Importance of Dedicated Units for the Management of Patients With Inherited Arrhythmia Syndromes

[ESC guideline 2022: management of ventricular arrhythmias in clinical practice]

The recently published guideline of the European Society of Cardiology for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death updates the guideline from 2015. Overall, the current guideline is characterised by a great practical relevance: Illustrative algorithms, e.g., for diagnostic evaluation, and tables make the guideline a user-friendly reference book. In the diagnostic evaluation and risk stratification of sudden cardiac death, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and genetic testing are significantly upgraded. In long-term management, the optimal treatment of the underlying disease is essential, and recommendations for heart failure therapy are adapted to current international guidelines. Catheter ablation is upgraded especially for patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and recurrent ventricular tachycardia, as well as in the management of symptomatic idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias. Criteria for primary prophylactic defibrillator therapy remain controversial. In the context of dilated cardiomyopathy, imaging, genetic testing, and clinical factors are given special weight in addition to left ventricular function. Additionally, revised diagnostic criteria for a large number of primary electrical diseases are provided.

ICD shocks and complications in patients with inherited arrhythmia syndromes

Background

There is limited information on the long-term outcomes of ICDs in patients with inherited arrhythmia syndromes.

Methods

Prospective registry study of inherited arrhythmia patients with an ICD. Incidence of therapies and complications were measured as 5-year cumulative incidence proportions and analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Incidence was compared by device indication, diagnosis type and device type. Cox-regression analysis was used to identify predictors of appropriate shock and device complication.

Results

123 patients with a mean follow up of 6.4 ± 4.8 years were included. The incidence of first appropriate shock was 56.52% vs 24.44%, p < 0.05 for cardiomyopathy and channelopathy patients, despite similar ejection fraction (61% vs 60%, p = 0.6). The incidence of first inappropriate shock was 13.46% vs 56.25%, p < 0.01 for single vs. multi-lead devices. The incidence of first lead complication was higher for multi-lead vs. single lead devices, 43.75% vs. 17.31%, p = 0.04. Patients with an ICD for secondary prevention were more likely to receive an appropriate shock than those with primary prevention indication (HR 2.21, CI 1.07-4.56, p = 0.03). Multi-lead devices were associated with higher risk of inappropriate shock (HR 3.99, CI 1.27-12.52, p = 0.02), with similar appropriate shock risk compared to single lead devices. In 26.5% of patients with dual chamber devices, atrial sensing or pacing was not utilized.

Conclusion

The rate of appropriate therapies and ICD complications in patients with inherited arrhythmia is high, particularly in cardiomyopathies with multi-lead devices. Risk-benefit ratio should be carefully considered when assessing the indication and type of device in this population.